ELECTION 2006 / Voters backing limits on growth

Glen Martin, Patrick Hoge, Chronicle Staff Writer

Published 4:00 am, Wednesday, November 8, 2006

Photo: Mike Kepka

Image 1of/1

Caption

Close

Image 1 of 1

fremont00048_mk.JPG Virgil Patterson, Elaine Szeto, Carin High, Howard High and Linda Patterson are members of The Friends of Coyote Hills and Fremont that have been fighting against development that lies in direct view of the Coyote Hills. Mike Kepka/The Chronicle (cq) virgil Patterson Elain Szeto Carin High Howard Hight Linda Patterson, The source Ran on: 11-08-2006
Virgil Patterson, Elaine Szeto, Carin High, Howard High and Linda Patterson, members of the Friends of Coyote Hills and Fremont, have been fighting development in view of the Coyote Hills.
Ran on: 11-08-2006
Virgil Patterson, Elaine Szeto, Carin High, Howard High and Linda Patterson, members of the Friends of Coyote Hills and Fremont, have been fighting development in view of the Coyote Hills. less

fremont00048_mk.JPG Virgil Patterson, Elaine Szeto, Carin High, Howard High and Linda Patterson are members of The Friends of Coyote Hills and Fremont that have been fighting against development that lies in ... more

Photo: Mike Kepka

ELECTION 2006 / Voters backing limits on growth

1 / 1

Back to Gallery

Voters around the Bay Area seemed to generally support a range of measures aimed at restricting development and preserving open space, according to early returns.

A measure to limit growth in Contra Costa County was passing with 64 percent of the vote, with 60 percent of precincts reporting. Measure L, which would compel the county's cities to adopt specific growth limits or forgo some sales tax revenue, had little opposition.

The measure was uncontroversial partly because the cities of Antioch and Pittsburg approved larger boundaries last year that would allow for construction of a combined 2,400 homes.

A growth-limiting measure in Santa Clara County was much more divisive. Measure A would limit development on ranches and hillsides covering about 400,000 acres. The measure had 52 percent of the vote with 554 of 1,244 precincts reporting.

If approved, the measure would affect nearly half the county, limiting the number of homes on ranchland to 1 per 160 acres instead of the current 8, and cutting the number of houses allowed on hillsides from 8 per 160 acres to 4.

Supporters of the limits -- including environmental groups, the League of Women Voters and a coalition of more than 200 businesses -- said the measure would curtail sprawl. Opponents, including the California Association of Realtors, farmers and homebuilders, said it would unfairly lower land values.

Similar arguments were made over Solano County's Measure J, which had the support of environmental groups. The measure sought to extend until 2036 growth boundaries that were first established in 1984, something that farming interests argued was unreasonable.

With 48 percent of precincts reporting, Measure J was opposed by 55 percent of voters.

Measures in three other counties involving open space and parkland also seemed likely to pass.

In San Mateo County, Measure A, which would pay to improve and maintain county parks, was leading with 79 percent of voters approving the measure and 21 percent in opposition, according to returns from 72 of 518 precincts. The measure would raise the county sales tax to 8.38 percent from the current 8.25 percent, generating an estimated $16 million annually.

Napa County's Measure I would create a park and open-space district. It led 52 percent to 48 percent, with 14 percent of precincts reporting. The proposed district would be run by a five-member elected board and get funding from the county.

Farmland is already largely protected from development in Napa County, where voter approval is needed to change the use of agricultural land, but the county has little accessible public open space.

Sonoma County's Measure F to fund the Sonoma County Open Space Authority was passing with 74 percent of the vote, according to returns from 202 of 470 precincts. The measure would extend an existing quarter-cent sales tax from 2011 to 2031. Estimates say it would generate $17 million to $30 million annually.

Voters in several cities also were deciding development issues.

Measure K in Fremont aimed to severely limit development on 512 acres of land near Coyote Hills Regional Park and the borders of Newark and Union City. The measure was opposed by 67 percent of voters in returns from 37 percent of precincts.

The measure came before voters after owners of the historic Patterson Ranch floated a development plan that called for building 800 homes, 20,000 square feet of retail space and other amenities on 420 acres. The rest of the land covered by Measure K is owned by Cargill Salt, which no longer produces salt on its land.

The landowners said the measure would lead to costly litigation, and opponents spent more than $1 million to defeat it. It was supported by local groups that received support from environmental organizations.

In Brisbane, voters were rejecting Measure B by 67 percent to 33 percent, according to preliminary returns from the three precincts. The measure would allow residential development in the former Guadalupe Valley Quarry. Proposals call for building 173 housing units of various types.

Quarry development was also the subject of Measure L in Pacifica. The measure was passing 51 percent to 49 percent, according to early returns.

A Florida developer sponsored Measure L, which would give the City Council authority to permit a 350-room luxury hotel, 355 residential units and business space on the site of the former Rockaway Quarry. Developer R. Donohue Peebles would still need the city to approve his project.